Chintu Chauhan v. State Of NCT Of Delhi
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 151/2026 CHINTU CHAUHAN .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Mohd. Arif, Advocate.
versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, APP for the State.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
O R D E R
% 30.01.2026 1.
The applicant/accused seeks grant of regular bail in case arising out of FIR No. 480/2025 dated 16.12.2025, registered at P.S. Tigri, for commission of offences under Sections 110/351/3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding Sections 308/503/506/507/34 of IPC). 2.
When the application was taken up on 15.01.2026, it was informed that aggravated offence i.e. 109(1) BNS (corresponding Section 307 IPC) has been added in place of 110 BNS (corresponding Section 308 IPC). 3.
The alleged incident took place on 12.12.2025 and, even as per the bare allegation appearing in the FIR, the complainant did not know the alleged assailants, beforehand. However, he claimed that he could identify them, if shown to him and that they were aged 20 to 25 years. 4.
The quarrel had taken place on the point of parking. When the complainant had come to the spot to pick up his vehicle, he noticed that one bike was parked on the rear side and two boys were standing near the bike. He asked them to remove the bike, which resulted in quarrel. Those two boys called 3-4 more persons and, thereafter, all such persons started beating up the complainant and, one of them hurled brick, which hit the complainant which BAIL APPLN. 151/2026 1 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 31/01/2026 at 13:45:06
resulted in injuries to him.
5.
As per the prosecution case, on 16.12.2025, two accused persons including the applicant herein were arrested at pointing out of complainant. No police custody remand was taken and they are in JC since then. 6.
When asked, the I.O. is present in Court has, in all fairness, admitted that there is no supplementary statement of the complainant, indicating the specific role of the present applicant and thus, at this stage, it is not clear as to who was the person who had hurled the brick.
7.
Though the nature of the injuries has been opined to be grievous in nature, the injured was discharged from the hospital, same day. 8.
The Nominal Roll received from the jail indicates the age of applicant as 29 years, with no previous involvement.
9.
Keeping in mind the overall facts and clean antecedents of applicant, he is enlarged on bail on his furnishing personal bond in a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of like amount subject to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Judicial Magistrate First Class. One of the surety would be local.
10.
Application stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. 11.
A copy of this order be sent to learned Trial Court and also to Jail Superintendent for information and compliance. MANOJ JAIN, J JANUARY 30, 2026/ss/pb BAIL APPLN. 151/2026 2 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 31/01/2026 at 13:45:06